Liberal Self-Criticism
December 23, 2009 3 Comments
From R.R. Reno First Thoughts:
Obviously, some American liberal intellectuals are quite clear-minded about the failures of liberalism. But as a whole, I’ve found that elite liberal culture is terribly provincial and not inclined toward self-criticism. Conservative intellectuals, on the other hand, tend to be well-informed about alternative views.
While I am prepared for the onslaught of outrage from my liberal readers for posting this quote, I have to say that my experience after 5 years of chat boards and blogging confirms this comment in a general and anecdotal way. As an example I will share this recent post at Submitted to a Candid World. While ACG occasionally has moments of self-reflection where he is able to abandon his role as loyal soldier for Obama, he ALWAYS includes caveats in his criticism. This sort of disingenuous half-criticism is what I have mostly come to expect from the Left.
As a further challenge to their powers of self-reflection I also recently asked ACG to go out on a limb and declare liberalism as the cure for society’s ills. He was unwilling to do so, for whatever reason I cannot determine (speculation that lawyers cannot give straight answers abounds). In this way we may see the closest thing to true liberal self-criticism, which is an unwillingness to embrace liberal ideology as superior to all else.
Reno further elaborates on his point by discussing another hallmark of liberalism, which is to exaggerate the dire circumstances of any given issue.
I would like to think that a conservative does not invest politics with ultimate significance. This can lead to an unattractive complacency on the Right. By contrast, liberalism tends to ascribe moral urgency to questions of public policy—the war against poverty, and so forth. The result is often political messianism, a fevered commitment that cannot countenance criticism.
There is a sort of manic atmosphere that often surrounds liberal reform and of course any criticism that impedes that effort is callous and immoral. This also means that if liberalism is going to take up the sword then there is no time to doubt liberalism itself. When you always believe you are on the side of righteousness, there’s little room for reflection.
Now Mike,
First of all, if you’re really looking for liberals criticising liberals, my blog is full of just that. So, for that matter is Glenn Greenwald’s – and his audience is far bigger then Ames’s – at least for the moment.
Second, Conservatives can and do follow the same “right makes might” mentality. How else do you explain former VP Dick Cheney’s infamous quote that public opinion doesn’t matter in how the President sets and enacts policy, on behalf of the people who elected him? Or how how about all the Conservative commentators who fawned all over President Bush while he was busy gutting the constitution with illegal wiretapping programs and expansions of the states secrets priveledge.
Look, NO SIDE is blameless in America today. NONE. ZIP. ZERO. So why not spend more of our time looking at and debating solutions?
And FWIW – Merry Christmas friend – it’s been agreat year sparing with you!
Let’s be frank about the issue here and that both sides are “rightseous” and self absorbed. Living in KY I would equate this to being a UofL Cardinal or UofK Wildcat fan….both sides think that they’re right in supporting/being loyal to their team (and they’d be right to a degree). You’ll be hard pressed to find a KY fan willing to support U of L …even when … they are playing … UNC for example..or visa-versa
My point being is that (IMO) being a Liberal or Conservative is a label and badge (of honor to some), but I will always say that the truth lies somewhere in between – or where I like to call the gray area of life.
I don’t believe it’s inherently wrong to choose to be “Libereal” or “Conservative” based on the binding priciples, but believe that it’s not right to choose a side, tow that line even when the truth is glaring you in the face.
In the end, most of the staunch supportes of either side will not reform or move a step closer to comprimising with the other side. It takes a strong individual to admit that the other side has a good idea and follow along with it.
As a general rule most the conservative movement has always been more prone to reflection and self-critique. This is why there are so many types of ‘hyphenated conservatism’ ie neocons, paleocons, etc. When I say conservative is more intellectual what I mean is that conservatives tend to spend a lot of time thinking about issues whereas liberals are a bit more in the ‘leap first, think later’ camp.